What the US 2024 “Election” Will Resolve:

[Politruk]

You mean like Obama, Soros, the DNC, the Clintons, and more?

It takes a real idiot to mention Soros in this context.

https://rationalwiki.org/w/images/thumb/5/52/Ben_Garrison_censored.jpg/225px-Ben_Garrison_censored.jpg

A Ben-Garrison-level idiot.

 

[TrailerHitch]

It takes a real idiot to mention Soros in this context.

https://rationalwiki.org/w/images/thumb/5/52/Ben_Garrison_censored.jpg/225px-Ben_Garrison_censored.jpg

A Ben-Garrison-level idiot.

It takes a bigger one to not know it's true.

 

[Politruk]

It takes a bigger one to not know it's true.

I suppose the Rothschilds are in the picture too?

 

[Holy_Seduction]

I offer that my original assertion is now borne out by events.

This election resolved not a solitary national or global crisis.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Russia chose to attack Ukraine.

Time for more attention on this.

Russian Federation security doctrine requires military neutrality of its borderlands. Think of this as an RF version of the Monroe Doctrine.

RF borderlands are free join and orient toward the EU, do their business there, and pretend that Europe sees and accepts them as one of their own. So long as borderlands remain militarily neutral toward the RF, well and good. Meaning? No NATO membership.

NATO membership means NATO weaponry on RF borders. Hence, a threat to security. So like the Monroe Doctrine, except we don’t limit this to borderlands; we in the US treat all the Americas as our borderlands. So the RF line means this:

No one gets to put a loaded gun to the Bear’s head.

Now that seems clear enough. But was it articulated clearly and understood? Yes. How do we know that? Because we were told that NATO membership meant war with Russia.

Really? And when did that happen?

Well — here is a partial list:

2004: Putin advised NATO leaders that this is the Federation’s ultimate red line.

2007: Putin's Munich Security Conference speech.

2008: Wm. Burns, US Ambassador to the Russian Federation published a vital paper on this matter.

Dmitry Medvedev's remarks at the NATO summit.

2014: Putin's statement after Crimea's annexation.

2016: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's comments on NATO expansion.

2019: Putin's speech at the Valdai Discussion Club.

Statements from the Russian Foreign Ministry about NATO's "open door" policy.

2020: Lavrov's comments on NATO exercises near Russian borders.

The Security Council of Russia Statements regarding NATO's influence in Eastern Europe.

2021: Medvedev's warning regarding NATO military presence in Ukraine.

Dmitry Peskov's remarks on NATO's role in regional security.

Putin's discussions with world leaders about NATO expansion during bilateral meetings.

2021-2022: Russian military officials' warnings about NATO's military buildup.

2022: Statements from Russian officials during the Ukraine crisis about NATO encroachment.

The RF “chose” [your word] war in view of decades of the collective west licensing and countenancing NATO membership discussion KNOWING that it meant war.

 

[Politruk]

and we're on Mars in 12 years.

In his first term Trump asked NASA if reaching Mars during his presidency was possible. Told no, he lost interest in space matters -- until it occurred to him that creating a military Space Force could be done right away, since it was only a reorganization of existing things.

Is all about his ego.

 

[Politruk]

Time for more attention on this.

Russian Federation security doctrine requires military neutrality of its borderlands. Think of this as an RF version of the Monroe Doctrine.

Exactly. The U.S. is the hegemonic power in the Western Hemisphere. That is at least tolerable. But the world cannot allow Russia to have that kind of regional hegemony. Russia must never again be a world power of the first rank. Russia has no business keeping NATO away from its borders.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Exactly. The U.S. is the hegemonic power in the Western Hemisphere. That is at least tolerable. But the world cannot allow Russia to have that kind of regional hegemony. Russia must never again be a world power of the first rank. Russia has no business keeping NATO away from its borders.

Politruk:

I see two issues with this. As I indicated in #127 with several links and a hard copy quote [to BrightShinyGirl], it’s a bit late to decree that the RF must never be allowed to become a great power.

Methinks that ship has sailed.

But the closing statement—a fiat declaration that the RF has no business keeping NATO weapons from its borders effectively prohibits the Federation from having control over its own security interests.

The scenario you describe would allow a decapitation strike on the RF. That is why the RF will never allow it.

This issue is the backdrop for the Ukraine conflict. And because the point has been made so many times by multiple persons in major events, over some two decades [the West has promoted this since the early 2000s, it is unquestionable that this was known. It was even declared in an open session of the General Assembly at the UN.

The admin tries to promote an “understanding” that pre SMO events are not to be discussed. As I see it, the record is too damaging to be allowed.

Now Russophobia has reached dangerously high levels — this at a time when out US Diplomatic Mission has collapsed, and the RF has recalled its Ambassador.

There is a desperate need for a sane, stable, sustained, national conversation about this which is not policed by either section of the ruling class.

 

[Politruk]

Politruk:

I see two issues with this. As I indicated in #127 with several links and a hard copy quote [to BrightShinyGirl], it’s a bit late to decree that the RF must never be allowed to become a great power.

The Russian Empire was a great power. The USSR was a great power. The RF is not -- not a power of the first rank. It is a lesser power than China. Without nuclear weapons, it would be a lesser power than India.

 

[Politruk]

There is a desperate need for a sane, stable, sustained, national conversation about this which is not policed by either section of the ruling class.

The plutocracy is one section -- what's the other?

 

[Holy_Seduction]

The Russian Empire was a great power. The USSR was a great power. The RF is not -- not a power of the first rank. It is a lesser power than China. Without nuclear weapons, it would be a lesser power than India.

Can you provide sources as I did in #127?

 

[Politruk]

Can you provide sources as I did in #127?

It's not only a matter of firepower and troop numbers. Russia has lost the international prestige and influence it used to have, the economic clout, the territory and natural resources. And the world needs to make sure all that stays lost.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

The plutocracy is one section -- what's the other?

I don’t disagree with the “P” word, but I’m a Marxist [don’t hide it; never have.

I use the terms ‘bourgeoisie’ or ‘petit bourgeoisie.’ These refer to the top 1% and The Next 9% respectively. This refers to the percentage of the population who rank in those two social classes.

The 1% [bourgeoisie] is the ownership class. These people own — factories, fields, forests, mines, corporations, bracket, energy, logistics, etc. That’s how they make their money. That is one percent of the population population at large.

The Next 9% after the top 1% is the investment class. These people invest — banks, finance companies, stocks, bonds, markets, sell-offs and buybacks, quarterly returns, etc. Thst is how they make money. That is The Next 9% after the top 1%.

Gonna quit for now.

 

[Deleted member 6873114]

War? Inequality? Dictatorship?

This glorious “election” resolves nothing.

Not one crisis. Nothing.

As the article states..

“The level of uncertainty and menace that surrounds the election process reflects the extent of the breakdown of American democracy.”

We put two spiders in a jar, make them fight.

Agree, disagree, and why.

Short term illusions of good results are sure to happen. But in the long run you are totally correct. The election resolves nothing. The election did not address the real problem. Neither side understands the cause of all the problems. Not just the problems we see now but the hideous history of the human race. Society in general learns nothing from history. A society that is unaware of history or fails to learn from history is like a person with brain damage that has no memory. Every thing they learn they forget. Each generation fails to learn from the mistakes of the past generation and loop with same dumb shit.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

“The election resolves nothing. The election did not address the real problem. Neither side understands the cause of all the problems ..,”

Oh look! Somebody who reflects on things!

You’re not just another pretty face. Are you.

 

[Hipshot1554]

Short term illusions of good results are sure to happen. But in the long run you are totally correct. The election resolves nothing. The election did not address the real problem. Neither side understands the cause of all the problems. Not just the problems we see now but the hideous history of the human race. Society in general learns nothing from history. A society that is unaware of history or fails to learn from history is like a person with brain damage that has no memory. Every thing they learn they forget. Each generation fails to learn from the mistakes of the past generation and loop with same dumb shit.

Exactly!

 

[Politruk]

I offer that my original assertion is now borne out by events.

This election resolved not a solitary national or global crisis.

Well, it did forestall the (not very great) possibility of a civil war.